Skip to main content

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: cosmicharIie Date: Jul 20, 2012 2:55pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Stones v. The Who

I never read Lolita but saw the movie, 3 questions about the novel, how old is Humbert, is Lolita of child bearing age and

What's your favorite Good Morning Little School Girl?
The early acid tests had plenty of underage females (and males) attending and trippin, Any women from that era would know of many Lolita trips and traps

one of my fav NPC is the Phil & Friends rendition probably because I was there - stage right box seats

http://archive.org/details/1999-06-04.paf.sbd.pujol.8496.sbeok.flacf

Phil Lesh - Bass and Vocals
Steve Kimock - Guitars
Praire Prince - Drums
Jorma Kaukonen - Guitar and Vocals
Pete Sears - Keyboards
Zoe Ellis - Vocals
Cailan Cornwell - Vocals
Dave Ellis - Sax on set 1

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: fenario80 Date: Jul 20, 2012 4:30pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Stones v. The Who

This is all off the top of my head, so it's more about my read than maybe what is actually on the page, but I do not believe that anybody's age is specifically stated. Lolita's Mom (a widow) and Humbert Humbert should be in their early to mid-30's. Lolita is described, frequently, as "pubescent," so that's probably around 12 in those days. Also, some time passes over the course of the novel, so she probably ages from about 12 to 14 or so.

Very important which version of the movie you saw -
was it the sublimely brilliant 1962 one by Stanley Kubrick with James Mason and Shirley Jones, or the shockingly bad 1997 one by Adrian Lyne with Jeremy Irons and Melanie Griffith? Adrian Lyne tried to sex it up, as if he had either never read the book or had no idea what it was really about.

Funny thing about Jeremy Irons, too, - who is a terrific actor and was so great playing delusional assholes in things like M Butterfly and Reversal of Fortune - he just didn't get seem to get Humbert at all. Or maybe that's the directors fault, too. See the Kubrick one if you haven't. James Mason is fearless and amazing.

Never been a big Pigpen fan, so I'm gonna check out your favorite Schoolgirl and call it my own.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Jul 20, 2012 4:53pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Stones v. The Who

Just FYI, Mason IS amazing, and it's with Sh Winters (mom) and Sue Lyon (Lolita); outstanding movie. Peter Sellers is FANTASTIC. Of course, worth noting that censorship was so heavy handed that Kubrick felt the movie couldn't/shouldn't have been made under those circumstances retrospectively, I think...?

Great flick. But, the love of my life, Shirley, would not have done it...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: micah6vs8 Date: Jul 21, 2012 12:23am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Stones v. The Who

Shelley had some chops: Wives & Lovers, The Dairy of Anne Frank, Lolita, Night of the Hunter, A Place in the Sun, Winchester '73, co-staring w/ folks like Jamie Stewart, Robert Mitchum , Lillian Gish, Montgomery Clift, and Elizabeth Taylor.

She didn't have Hollywood looks, but when in a dramatic role she could be excellent. She made 95 films, most of them shloch comedies, were she often played the plump ditz, of which she seems most remembered for these days. But she was also on Broadway and in many a theater cast.

As a aside, '72 must have been the worst year for movies. She gets nominated for an Oscar for The Poseidon Adventure? The Poseidon Adventure?

This post was modified by micah6vs8 on 2012-07-21 07:23:20

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: AltheaRose Date: Jul 21, 2012 1:48am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Stones v. The Who

Whaaat?!? You're dissing Poseidon Adventure? You obviously weren't 10 or 12 in 1972.

Hmmm, come to think if it, we really didn't have many choices in '72 ... which may explain why I saw Poseidon Adventure so many times. There was also a Planet of the Apes movie wherein the same treehouse exploded in fire about five times. That was cheesy. Poseidon Adventure was way better.

"There's got to beeeee a morning after ..."

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: rdenirojb87 Date: Jul 21, 2012 6:41am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: '72 Films

"As a aside, '72 must have been the worst year for movies."

Well there was this little flick called The Godfather. Otherwise I agree, it was a rather lackluster year for films. Deliverance? Eh, overrated imo. I did like Sleuth with Laurence Olivier and Michael Caine. The most overlooked and under-appreciated film of 1972 is Aguirre: The Wrath of God.

And while it's no Godfather, I love The Way of the Dragon. One of Bruce Lee's best. Cabaret I can do without.

The next few years of cinema (after '72) yielded many of my favorite films of all time. Taxi Driver, Godfather Part II (better than part I imo), The Sting, The Holy Grail (Monty Python), Cuckoo's Nest, Blazing Saddles, Dog Day Afternoon, Star Wars, Jaws, Rocky, High Plains Drifter & Outlaw Josey Wales, All The President's Men, and of course Magnum Force and Death Wish, just to name a few.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: micah6vs8 Date: Jul 21, 2012 12:29pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: '72 Films

Thank-you for forgiving my stupidity Don Corleone. Oh no! That was the next one. Wait, there is a knock on the door...

Luca Brasi steps over body at front door.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Jul 21, 2012 7:13am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: '72 Films

Right with you on Aguirre, one of Herzog's finest, and never likely to be overlooked or under appreciated so long as perceptive film fans like us are around eh? Let's not forget Solaris and The Goalkeeper's Fear of the Penalty either. And in all honesty I just loved What's Up Doc? - kind of had a thing for Streisand back then... :-)

Oh yeah, hello!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: rdenirojb87 Date: Jul 21, 2012 7:38am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: From Bob to Rob

I suppose there are other perceptive film fans who appreciate Aguirre, but not as many as there should be. I don't think the film ever got much exposure, and to me it seems most people have never even heard of it. It has a decent cult following, but I've found that only real film fanatics are fans of it, or even know about it. I did indeed forget about Solaris. For some reason I thought that was late '60s.

I imagine that Goalkeeper film isn't too popular over here, since I've never heard of it. As for What's Up Doc, what's not to love? I must admit, I kind of had a thing for Randy Quaid ;-)

And hello to you. Gone are the days of your quibbling? I do miss all that good fun.

This post was modified by rdenirojb87 on 2012-07-21 14:38:43

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Jul 21, 2012 7:57am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: From Bob to Rob

Quibbling, sir? A forthright exchange of views, surely!
:-)


Who knows, maybe I'll come back and have some fun...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: fenario80 Date: Jul 20, 2012 6:38pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Stones v. The Who

Shelley's also terrific in a number of early-50's film noirs and - Night of the Hunter, of course. The Poseidon Adventure nomination is pretty wacky ...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Jul 20, 2012 6:55pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Stones v. The Who

Absolutely...was just kidding about the fact that you said Jones, given her goody goody rep...love her in the Music Man, nonetheless.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: fenario80 Date: Jul 20, 2012 6:21pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Stones v. The Who

I can't BELIEVE that I wrote Shirley Jones - when this is famously one of Shelley Winters best roles.

The censorship of the era is okay by me for this movie. I wouldn't have wanted to see James Mason all over Sue Lyon, anyway

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: micah6vs8 Date: Jul 21, 2012 12:22am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Stones v. The Who

I think the film is perfect the way it is too.

I can't spell it either.

This post was modified by micah6vs8 on 2012-07-21 07:22:01